Here’s the ARTICLE from Army Times.  Yup.  So what is our response?  Do we even need to say anything?  Is it necessary to weigh in?  Hell yes it is…

I’m somewhat reserved on this one, but hopefully testing was thorough a and good decisions were made.

Personally, while I admit freely I’m a Glock fan, I’ve been elbow deep in so many weapons for so many years, I’m not shocked to see this playing out like it has.

While nobody learned could argue there is a more simple weapon up for consideration than an average Glock, simplicity isn’t the only consideration. There’s a trend towards modular, and it is being pushed heavily. Personally, I think it’s pretty dumb. But… I can see why.

As I was leaving the power systems industry I had many customers that were literally building mediocrity into their business plans.  No joke.  Many were scrambling to achieve two things.  First, they were trying to automate everything possible to avoid the reliance on human beings.  Second, they were forecasting significant decreases in proficiency as they projected the ‘younger’ generation coming into the workforce would simply not put out “X” amount of work in an average 40 hour week.  That’s troubling.  I suppose you can either prepare for the future by making things idiot proof or you can elevate your people.  The Army has chosen to embrace the dumb.

This doesn’t mean that the Army is comprised of stupid people.  I’m simply saying they are catering to the lowest common denominator as we descend into modularity.  Some would argue with me this is necessary.  Some would argue otherwise.

We tried to make a modular ‘fighter, bomber, surveillance’ jet and it appears to be good and terrible at the same time. We also have to consider the armed services want parts hangers and not smiths. so they probably benefit from sub assemblies you take out and chuck in the trash while popping a new one in. This is wasteful and costly, but easy for folks.

Like the zen master said, “we’ll see”…